1 John 2:23 says that whoever denies the Son denies the Father as well, and vice versa – whoever confesses the Son confesses the Father. What’s the logic here? Is John assuming that Jesus is the mediator who makes a way to the Father, so that denying him closes off the way to the Father? Perhaps. But John might also, already, be employing a form of argument later found in Athanasius: If you deny the Son, then you deny that... Read more
It’s common among evangelicals to say that the gospel is about God solving the tension between His justice and His mercy. As a just God, He must punish sin; as a merciful God, He seeks to save. The cross combines the two. At one level, I have no problem with this. But it is problematic both theologically and exegetically. Theologically because it reifies the attributes of God and implicitly denies the simplicity of God. Exegetically because, as John says, it... Read more
I’ve commented before on the sequence of 1 John 1:7, which moves from walking in the light to fellowship with one another, to cleansing by Jesus’ blood. The presence of “fellowship with one another” between walking in the light and cleansing is striking. Equally striking is the conditional introduction to the entire verse. Our ability to have fellowship with one another depends on our walking in the light; that makes sense, light and darkness are incompatible with one another, and... Read more
Reviewing several recent books on the Christian Right in the current issue of First Things, Ross Douthat has this to say about Rushdoony: “What he has instead are the Christian Reconstructionists—the acolytes of the late R.J. Rushdoony—who are genuine theocrats, of a sort, and who also rank somewhere between the Free Mumia movement and the Spartacist Youth League on the totem pole of political influence in America. Yet this doesn’t prevent them from figuring prominently in nearly all the anti-theocrat... Read more
Reviewing several recent books on the Christian Right in the current issue of First Things, Ross Douthat has this to say about Rushdoony: “What he has instead are the Christian Reconstructionists—the acolytes of the late R.J. Rushdoony—who are genuine theocrats, of a sort, and who also rank somewhere between the Free Mumia movement and the Spartacist Youth League on the totem pole of political influence in America. Yet this doesn’t prevent them from figuring prominently in nearly all the anti-theocrat... Read more
Occasionally, I run into people who have never heard of Ken Myers and his Mars Hill Audio ministry. What a tragedy, I think. In case you happen to be one of the darkened multitude, Myers is one of the best-informed Christian cultural commentators of our time, and his audio magazine and other interviews provide some of the most insightful cultural analysis you can find. I recently learned that Myers’s work is being podcast. I don’t even know what that means,... Read more
In a Biblical Horizons lecture, Rich Bledsoe argued that the doctrine of justification by faith was the doctrine that needed to be emphasized in the 16th century to exorcise the medieval world where power was based on condemnation. Because of Luther, everyone could stand up to the condemnation of the medieval church or the contempt of an aristocracy say “You can’t condemn me; I’m justified in Christ.” Luther’s doctrine was necessary and the right thing to emphasize. But we don’t... Read more
Baptism unites the baptized to the church, which is the bride of Christ. Brides take the name of their husbands, and thus all who are baptized take on the name of Jesus – they are Christians because “Christ” is their Husband’s name. Only feminists would want the baptized to keep their own names after baptism. Read more
Gary Burge points out in his NIV commentary on 1 John that the relative pronoun that begins the letter is neuter, even though the subject (LOGOS) is masculine. Drawing on Raymond Brown, he suggests that the neuter is used because it covers not just the person of Jesus the Word, but the whole “sweep of Jesus’ life.” That is to say, the gospel proclaimed by John is the whole life, death, resurrection of Jesus. And since Jesus recapitulates the history... Read more
It’s common to reconcile James and Paul on justification by saying something like “Paul’s faith is not the faith that James is talking about, and James’ justification is not the justification Paul is talking about.” That is, James is talking about some kind of demonstration of being in a justified state rather than the forensic act by which God places us in that justified state. At times, it is said that James uses “justify” to refer to public vindication before... Read more
Leithart
Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In